Warren Climate Plan Would Reverse Trump Tax Cuts for Rich to Help Fund Transition to 100% Renewable Energy
I don’t trust Warren, tomorrow it will be Access to Renewable Energy.
“Everyone should be able to access high-quality, affordable, gender-affirming healthcare,” she wrote.
Federal election filings reveal that Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s campaign, which had vowed to “stand with the Palms workers” as early as March, has repeatedly crossed the picket line at the Palms Casino Resort, which is in the crosshairs of the union’s boycott, with stays in May and June.
Liz, take back more than the free billions Trump gave the 1%. Go all the way back to Raygun. I am now in my eighties, I don’t have time for thirty year ‘transitions’ that will be reversed the first day the next neo-fascist is elected. Instead of talking wonkie policy, you need to be screaming for mass demonstrations like joining Greta at the Great Gathering for Survival come September 20.
Shut it down. Create an energy vacuum filled by private sector innovation.
How is $1 trillion over 10 years even remotely close to what would be needed to reach 100% renewable energy? Warren is being incredibly deceiving here. It would take 10s if trillions to get to 100% renewable energy. It would take a complete takeover over the economy, ala Venezuela.
Along with all the green energy plans needs to be a drastic reduction in overconsumption as defined as consuming more than we need for survival and a drastic curb in procreating–this libido needs to be harnessed for all the creative endeavors for a livable world.
See you all out on September 20.
Disagree completely with your view. Who decides what “overconsumption” is? Your idea leads to starvation and death. You are deliberately advocating for Siberia. Disgraceful.
And how are you going to regulate people having children? Will you set up gulags for people who accidentally have a second child?
Unlike Sanders, Warren always uses carefully worked out language that allows her to mean less than she appears to be saying and to move right later. She focuses on the “middle class” (management) rather than on the working class and the poor. She omits ending fracking in her plan which, as usual, falls short of what Sanders has already put forth and which she endorsed. I like Warren but fear that she has too much “real-politik” opportunism and is not as authentic as Bernie.
Yes. Lots of “provate sector innovation” here in western PA - the innovation in putting those fracking wells, pilelines, compressor stations, massive plastic petrochemical plants that will provide a big market for all the gas, more pipelines to export the rest. All of it done “innovatively” using the hightest technologies to lower the cost and build it even faster.
I have nothing to do with the fossil fuel industry’s ad agency, which seems to be posting here.
I do urge Senator Warren to emphasize merit-driven research and development. The Federal government has a long, consistent history of either eminence-driven R&D or flat-out corruption-driven R&D. It’s sort of like the plan is really good except for the you’re completely shafted part. At the end of the you’re completely shafted cycle, Senator Warren can then announce, “Well, I had no way of knowing this beforehand.”
Nobody is going to starve if they can’t buy a multiple huge F150 crew cabs and full-size SUV’s with their huge “toy hauler” trailers in tow. And nobody is going to starve if they can’t run the AC in their mcmansion down to 65F in summer (“75F is way too hot”) while they heat to 75F in winter (the same 65F thay insisted in summer is now “too cold” in winter).
I’m not making this up. Vast swaths of the US suburban Trump-loving bourgeois really live like this.
Do any of your comments not posit a black or white, free market or Siberia outcome?
Wouldn’t that be awful… a nation that uses natural national resources to benefit all.
Just imagine the jobs created to benefit the entire nation - not just the wealthy (the 1% will survive climate change just fine). Maybe we could use our military to benefit society instead of just for regime-change for-profit?
To be fair, it does alternate between Siberia and Venezuela.
Yes. Elizabeth had quite a telling moment BEFORE the primary last time when she abandoned the left and endorsed Hillary over the founder of the progressive caucus, Sen. Sanders.
When the rubber hit the road, Warren ran right, right back into Reaganomics and establishment neoliberal / neocon policy. As an economics professor, she advocated Reagan’s smoke and mirrors.
I wonder… if given a veto-proof Senate and a Veto-proof House if Warren, like Obama, would evolve back into Republican policy… demanding that Republicans be given the opportunity to create a consensus.
After people have sent this world to hell with over consumption and over population, how are you going to apologize for shooting down people’s initiatives when you never bothered to offer any ideas of your own to solve the problems facing us today? Lead, follow, or get out of the way. Right now, you’re just being in the way.
As a free market cheerleader, he tends to focus on countries where the free market includes the heaviest US economic sanctions. I mean, nothing screams free market like seizing assets and refusing to trade.
Sorry, CD. No interest in “Tin Lizzie” and her con games to win the election then wuss out and flip later.
Here is the difference between Sanders and Warren - Bernie has a plan to mobilize millions in support of his programs. I have yet to hear or see anything from Lizzie (no disrespect) as to how she plans to implement her ideas and programs. Obama had great ideas also but not only did he not have any plans to implement those, even with democrat control of both houses, he also had no intention of even trying. Ms. Warren please explain how you will implement your programs especially with the Democrat Party in full resistance mode.